Town Square

The need to freeze salaries

Russell seemed to have some difficulty finding articles about school districts freezing salaries so...

Following are some articles about school districts proposing salary freezes. One common thread in articles is that no one wants to freeze salaries, and it's not a popular option - just a necessary one.

www.mtexpress.com
April 15, 2009
School District proposes teacher salary freeze

www.eastvalleytribune.com
April 22, 2009
District plans to freeze teachers' salaries

"Last week, Superintendent Edgar B. Hatrick III proposed forgoing the step increase, a move he said would align Loudoun schools with others in the state. Some of the savings would preserve jobs that had been in jeopardy....Initially, Hatrick proposed cutting more than 80 positions and increasing average class sizes by half a student. "

Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Apr 25, 2009 at 8:21 pm

A salary freeze is a reasonable request if the community is going to provide additional tax dollars. Employees at my company accepted a pay cut with little to no complaints due to the economic difficulties our business sector is going through. I really don't understand why PUSD employees can't agree to this.

Posted by because
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 25, 2009 at 8:30 pm

Pleasanton Parent: You probably weren't given a choice in the matter. Unless it was wage cut or no job.

The teachers have essentially have a choice. I am not sure what decision I would make if I as a teacher. It is easy to think we would all accept a pay if we were in their shoes...but we aren't. So, we don't really know. And, in most of jobs, we certainly aren't dealing with youth today and their parents.

Posted by %^&*
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 25, 2009 at 9:36 pm

Pleasanton Parent,
Your company also tried other ways to make money before they cut jobs or salaries. They 1st raise the price for their service or product. A school district can only make cuts or ask for their employees to take cuts.

School district is not a business. They cannot raise the price of their service unless the state or local governments give them the money. The purpose of a business is to make money and get bigger. That is not the purpose of a school district.

Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Apr 25, 2009 at 10:25 pm

%^&*, - actually, my company reduced margin on our products first and worked with customers to identify additional cost saving opportunities. After that, they required mandatory 5 days off per quarter, then they froze all merit and promotional increases, then they had the first round of layoffs, then they reduced salaries, and finally a second round of layoffs. Meanwhile we're still taking five days off per quarter.

Point is, my employer worked with our customers and suppliers to identify ways to reduce costs first. And throughout it all, they haven't gone to the stockholders (or taxpayers) for additoinal funds.

Posted by Russell
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Apr 25, 2009 at 11:25 pm

"Russell seemed to have some difficulty finding articles about school districts freezing salaries so"

Where did I say that other school districts aren't taking pay cuts? If I said it, it was a mistake. I don't deny they are doing it. Other districts are doing all kinds of screwed up things. The vast majority of them are worse school districts than Pleasanton.

I'm saying if your going to cut some kind of spending, I can think of all kinds of other things than education.

Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Apr 26, 2009 at 7:43 am

Russell: When you say you can think of all kinds of places to cut besides education, are you talking about the state budget? I ask because the only place budget issues can be resolved for PUSD is by a thorough review of their budget and that means education.

Posted by Russell
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Apr 26, 2009 at 2:04 pm

I think we are still spending on the low side in K-12 education and very low side in colleges and universities. The second link was just a very broad comparison. It wasn't specific to California or Pleasanton.

I'd like to see special science labs set up at our high schools so that we can teach real college level biology, physics, chemistry, and computer classes to advanced students. Some charter schools are already doing things like this in other places and seeing very positive results. Look at the gold medal list in that US News and World Report survey, and there are many examples. Those kinds of things really attract people to a school district. They attract people who value education.

"Of the 21,069 public high schools examined by U.S. News and its partner in the project, School Evaluation Services, 1,925 were recognized for considerably outperforming their state's standards. In that group, there were 604 schools that also were found to be doing an excellent job of preparing students for college-level coursework. California leads the nation this year with 209 high schools that earned recognition, followed by Texas (151 schools), New York (105 schools), Ohio (87 schools), Michigan (74 schools), and Illinois (71 schools)."

So if you say that "we" (And I assume you mean California, since you include K-12 and colleges and universities) aren't spending enough, how is it that California has more than one-third of all schools nationwide that are doing an excellent job of preparing students for college?

Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Apr 26, 2009 at 3:56 pm

Russell, You didn't answer how much more is enough. And you were completely dismissive of the fact that CA already spends an exorbitant amount on K-12 education AND that K-12 education costs have increased nationally without correlation to results. So in the face of facts you don't like, ignore the facts?

Posted by Get out of the wagon
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 28, 2009 at 2:04 pm

Russell,

I will support Measure G…If you will pay my $233/year.

If not, then stop trying to argue an emotional argument with those of us that are fiscally responsible and are not in support of this tax at this time.

Another poster on a different thread summed the logic of why we shouldn’t support this tax: He said as an ER doctor he needs to locate the site of a bleed and repair it first. Sure, he can continually pump in new blood to keep the patient alive, or in our case pump in more money to the district, but unless the source of the problem is fixed, no matter how much blood or money is pumped in, it will not fix the REAL problem.

Your argument for weeks (at least) has been that we should support Measure G because "Pleasanton schools are SO good". Well, does the good ER doctor's example above become false if the patient is now the esteemed President of the United States or another very important person? No. Your shallow arguments have wasted a lot of people's time.

If you have something that is factual and can be verified as to why we good citizens should give more of OUR money to this problem, I mean school district, before PUSD locates the hemorrhage so it can first be fixed, then I want you to volunteer to pay my parcel tax for me. This is not an outrageous request since you think it is "only" $233 a year and it is for a "good" cause and the teachers of PUSD "deserve" it.

The ball is in your court. Let me know the address of your "court" so I can forward my tax bill to you.